'POLICE LIES' AND 'GOVERNMENT COVER-UP' ON LOCKERBIE

LOCKERBIE AND THE FINANCING OF 9 11 / LOCKERBIE IS ABOUT HEROIN

In the case of the 1988 Lockerbie Bombing, a growing number of people believe that Megrahi was framed and that the Scottish Government is part of the cover-up.

On 21 August 2011, an article by Scotland's top journalist Marcello Mega, in the top selling Scottish Sun, tells us:

1. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission looked into the evidence against Abdelbaset Ali al Megrahi - and found a load of lies.

2. The SCCRC's report "suspects the Scots authorities are behind a deliberate cover-up."

3. In the dossier, Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci, who hesitatingly identified Megrahi as the bomber, is described as an "unreliable" witness.

4. Police are accused of lying in court.

5. Prosecutors are suspected of suppressing evidence that would likely have let Megrahi walk free.

6. Robert Black, retired Professor of Scots Law at Edinburgh University and the architect of the Lockerbie trial, says: "Megrahi is not the Lockerbie bomber and these revelations further underline that."



Seven key flaws

1. Denied fair trial

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission says Megrahi WAS denied a fair trial.

They said the Crown suppressed from Megrahi's defence team statements showing how much key witness Tony Gauci changed his mind about crucial details over the years.

The SCCRC report says Gauci was an "unreliable" witness.

2. Police lies

According to the CIA, FBI and Scottish police, the bomber bought clothes at a shop in Malta owned by Tony Gauci.

The SCCRC found that police said in evidence they first showed Gauci photos of Megrahi on September 14, 1989 - when he had in fact also been shown them on September 8.

The report said: "This was not disclosed to the defence. There is no statement from Gauci produced, no police witness statements produced."

The SCCRC said if Gauci had been shown Megrahi's pic six days before he picked him out as resembling the bomber, then that ID was totally undermined.

3. Diary dispute

The SCCRC challenges the integrity of evidence given by retired Strathclyde DCI Harry Bell, who had a close bond with Gauci.

The commission found that events recorded in Bell's diaries didn't always match what he said in evidence.

The commission noted that Bell claimed the Megrahi photo shown to Gauci on September 14, 1989, was the first one.

This was not true.

It also reveals Bell, DC John Crawford, a retired Lothian and Borders policeman, and an FBI agent all made statements claiming that Gauci had talked of a "striking similarity" between Megrahi and the bomber.

But Maltese officers revealed Gauci was unsure, was coached and told to age the photos by ten to 15 years.

The report says: "This is different to DCI Bell's evidence at trial. It also implies the witness is unclear."

4. Cash for answers

The commission obtained evidence from police memos that Gauci was made aware from his first contact with investigators that his testimony could be worth MILLIONS.

This contradicted evidence given by Scots and US investigators at Megrahi's trial.

One undisclosed memo reveals the FBI discussed with Scots police an offer of unlimited cash to Gauci - with "$10,000 available immediately".

If a judge was made aware of this in another case, they'd tell a jury to discount the evidence.

5. Xmas lights lies

In court Gauci was vague about the exact date on which the clothes were bought.

The date was narrowed to either November 23, 1988, when Megrahi was not on Malta, or December 7, 1988, when he was.

Gauci said Christmas lights were NOT on yet in his hometown Sliema when the suspect visited his shop.

Cops said they could not find out when the lights were switched on.

But the SCCRC easily established it was December 6 - a day too early for Megrahi to have been the buyer.

The commission's report says: "It is clear that the police were in no doubt that Gauci was clear in his recollection."

It adds "no reasonable court" could have concluded Megrahi bought the clothes from Gauci's shop.

6. Defence in the dark

It appears efforts were made to cover up key evidence that would have been useful for Megrahi's defence team.

The commission noted that early uncertainty on the part of Gauci was never passed over to the defence, nor was the fact that Scots detectives feared he was trying too hard to please them.

The fact a senior Maltese detective also considered Gauci to be an unreliable witness was never disclosed to lawyers representing Megrahi.

7. Evidence supressed

The SCCRC claims Colin Boyd QC, who was Lord Advocate at the time of Megrahi's trial and conviction in 2001, suppressed key evidence.

The trial judges maintained Gauci was "entirely reliable" on the list of clothing he claimed the buyer suspect purchased.

Yet a statement he made in 1999, and discovered by the SCCRC, saw him produce "a wholly different list of items and prices".

This, along with many other files that could damage the Crown case, was suppressed.

The report says Mr Boyd failed in his duty of disclosure to the defence.

~~

Al-Megrahi was the only Libyan in the identity parade

Court should have heard ID evidence

Did secret report set Megrahi free?

"Suspicion has persisted that Scottish authorities did not want the contents of the SCCRC findings made public."